Bills to work out TE Jace Sternberger (now signed to 1 year deal)

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

Based on BB’s comments about Dalton playing the “Big Slot”, I expect 3 TEs on the roster. Possibly 4 if they decide FB isn’t in the plans. 🤷‍♂️ 

 

Yea I expect three tight ends IF they have a third guy worth keeping. They won't keep three tight ends to keep an inferior player and lose a guy they like at another spot, but we know they already like Morris some and as I said above they liked Sternberger enough to bring him in pre-draft back in 2019. I think that could develop into a nice little camp battle for TE3. 

 

They will keep Reggie Gilliam though, unless something really odd happens. He is a core special teamer, can play traditional full back, in line tight end and H-back in a pinch. There is value in that multi-functionality. 

[White Linen]

8 hours ago, Chandler#81 said:

riiiight.. 🤦‍♂️ Both were 3rd Round picks, 1 stuck with his team, became a starter in his 2nd season and is now recognized as a critical player on a perennial Playoff team. The other was cut, couldn’t catch on with another NFL club, couldn’t catch on with a CFL team and is now bouncing around on scrap heaps. But he’s a better receiver.

Please keep your insane humor coming. We all need numerous interludes.

 

Anyway, I like this signing. Even figuring McDermott to continue with his maddening penchant to sit rookies, Kincaid represents a significant departure from our Offense, especially with letting Beasley walk for a 2nd time. 2 TE sets are a growing trend but must be manned by players with excellent skill sets. The premise alone is an advantage to nickel coverage.

 

Take a breathe psycho.  I only said he has better hands as a matter of my opinion in response to a post about Jace being used specifically in the red zone. Knox is obviously the much better, accomplished and proven player.

 

 

 

Edited July 25, 2023 by White Linen

[FieldGeneral]

Can he fill in at RB on obvious passing downs or return kicks?

[DJB]

11 minutes ago, FieldGeneral said:

Can he fill in at RB on obvious passing downs or return kicks?

 

He can play DB and Oline in a pinch 

[Shaw66]

I don't study the draft, so I had no idea who Sternberger was until I saw this thread.   Having read the thread and the comments about how he sort blew up his career coming out of college, I think the Bills are thinking there's something else going on here.   I think the Bills asked him, "Kid, have you rehabilitated yourself?"  (apologies to Arlo).  In fact, I think the Bills are already sure that he's a good bet. 

 

I say all the time that one thing you can tell about players in the draft is the quality of their physical skills.   Guys taken in the first have outstanding talent, in the second, high-quality starter talent, in the third, starter talent.  After that, guys are projects.  

 

Third round, Sternberger presumptively has starter talent.  (He played some quarterback in high school, he was a star tight-end on an undefeated state championship team, and he was a power forward on the basketball team.)  If the Bills were interested in him in the draft, then he passed the Bills' character screens - hard worker, team orientation, wants to learn, etc.   In his college career, he bounced around.  In his pro career, he got injured, had a substance abuse suspension (related to his recovery?), caught a playoff TD from Rodgers, got released by the Pack and bounced around, only to resurface as a standout in the USFL.  Sounds very much like a guy who needed a reset.  The Bills signing him suggests that they think he now is bringing to the game the kind of attitude that they value. 

 

Training camp and preseason will give him six weeks to demonstrate that he's now bringing the right focus to the game.   He's still a project, but an interesting gamble.   If he makes the roster, great.  If he goes to the practice squad, he probably won't stay there, because other teams will recognize that the only reason he isn't on the roster is the Bills' depth at the position.  If he gets cut, then we'll know he's just the latest in a long line of receivers who I, along with a lot of others, fell in love with who never went anywhere. 

[Solomon Grundy]

I'm very surprised not to see any Andrew Norwell posts

[BigAl2526]

21 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Sternberger went ahead of Knox in the draft, and Big Al's description actually sounds a lot like Knox.   OK speed, OK route runner, undersized for a blocker, but that's undersized for a traditional tight end.  

 

Take another Knox and put him on the field just as DC said, in the red zone, and you've got something.   Diggs is a guy who separates like Beasley, and he's valuable, but teams were taking him away in the red zone, the Bills didn't other have good options.  I like Davis, but he hasn't been effective in the red zone.  Knox has.  Kincaid should be.   If there's a Knox clone on the field, that's four legitimate short-route targets, and it should be a simple thing for Allen to find the mismatch and go there.   Knox. Sternberger, and Kincaid all running tight curls, some small back will be boxed out by a big body.  

My recollection is that Knox was very athletic coming out of college with high end speed.  The knock on him was lack of productivity and experience.  He had been a QB in high school and was very much underutilized at Ole Miss because the WRs at Ole Miss were DK Metcalf and AJ Brown.

 

[Nextmanup]

Beane got 'er done!

 

 

[PromoTheRobot]

 

Pretty much ONLY Birmingham Stallions are getting signed. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TOboy]

There’s at least a remote chance Sternberger can contribute. Can’t really ask for me from a camp signing. 

[Gugny]

Obviously this means that either Kincaid or Knox is injured or facing a suspension. 
 

I will wait with clinched buttcheeks. 

[78thealltimegreat]

He has tremendous hands but not the fastest guy and is an average blocker but as a TE3 option it ain’t bad. 

[Beck Water]

On 7/24/2023 at 6:09 PM, That's No Moon said:

Kincaid took his role.

 

I hope not.

 

The guy whose role I think we want Kincaid to fill is McKenzie/Crowder - on the field ~60% of the time, hauling them in over the middle.

 

Morris was a 25% of the snaps on offense guy, who played 2/3 of the ST snaps.  That's not what we want from our 1st round pick.  Now, there's some good stuff that Morris did, which we hope Kincaid can emulate - did a good job of getting on the same page and getting open for Josh on extended plays.  Ran good routes.  Showed signs of being able to release with some nifty moves like the arm-over he pulled off, think it was against Miami.

 

The Bills didn't keep 2 TE in 2021 and it was a bit unusual.  2019 saw them keeping 4, Knox Sweeney Kroft and Smith.  In 2020 they kept 3 (if we count Gilliam as a FB): Knox, Tyler Kroft, and Lee Smith.  2022 was Knox, Morris, and Sweeney.

 

I don't think it's a stretch at all to think they'll keep 3, but I wouldn't count out Morris in favor of Sternberger unless Sternberger shows some stuff on ST.

 

 

[Patrick Duffy]

2 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I hope not.

 

The guy whose role I think we want Kincaid to fill is McKenzie/Crowder - on the field ~60% of the time, hauling them in over the middle.

 

Morris was a 25% of the snaps on offense guy, who played 2/3 of the ST snaps.  That's not what we want from our 1st round pick.  Now, there's some good stuff that Morris did, which we hope Kincaid can emulate - did a good job of getting on the same page and getting open for Josh on extended plays.  Ran good routes.  Showed signs of being able to release with some nifty moves like the arm-over he pulled off, think it was against Miami.

 

The Bills didn't keep 2 TE in 2021 and it was a bit unusual.  2019 saw them keeping 4, Knox Sweeney Kroft and Smith.  In 2020 they kept 3 (if we count Gilliam as a FB): Knox, Tyler Kroft, and Lee Smith.  2022 was Knox, Morris, and Sweeney.

 

I don't think it's a stretch at all to think they'll keep 3, but I wouldn't count out Morris in favor of Sternberger unless Sternberger shows some stuff on ST.

 

 

 

He will have his opportunities obviously, but not sure what percentage it may be. Might be a bit less than what some may think, at least starting off since I'd expect he will get worked in a little slowly. Also it's possible Shakir might make a run too and play a factor. So will be interesting seeing how many of these things play out leading up to the start of the season

[John from Riverside]

13 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea I expect three tight ends IF they have a third guy worth keeping. They won't keep three tight ends to keep an inferior player and lose a guy they like at another spot, but we know they already like Morris some and as I said above they liked Sternberger enough to bring him in pre-draft back in 2019. I think that could develop into a nice little camp battle for TE3. 

 

They will keep Reggie Gilliam though, unless something really odd happens. He is a core special teamer, can play traditional full back, in line tight end and H-back in a pinch. There is value in that multi-functionality. 

Reggie is one of the better full backs in the league too. He’s not going anywhere.

[PromoTheRobot]

31 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Reggie is one of the better full backs in the league too. He’s not going anywhere.

 

Competition. Iron sharpens iron.

[Solomon Grundy]

2 hours ago, 78thealltimegreat said:

He has tremendous hands but not the fastest guy and is an average blocker but as a TE3 option it ain’t bad. 

An upgrade to Tommy Sweeney

[78thealltimegreat]

8 hours ago, Solomon Grundy said:

An upgrade to Tommy Sweeney

He pretty much is if he can stay healthy the Bills might have gone from one of the worst TE rooms in the league to between himself, Knox, Kincaid, and Morris on the bubble…to one of the best 

[GunnerBill]

11 hours ago, Beck Water said:

I don't think it's a stretch at all to think they'll keep 3, but I wouldn't count out Morris in favor of Sternberger unless Sternberger shows some stuff on ST.

 

Yea I think they will keep 3. It isn't impossible they keep 4 but that would require going light somewhere and Sternberger and Morris would have to excel to make that a sensible decision I think. It's a good point you make about Morris's tight end usage though. Your backup tight ends have to play teams. They went with two active tight ends on game day for most of last season. Morris as the backup played 67% of all ST snaps. Knox isn't being put out there on teams. Kincaid isn't. So they might need a 3rd active TE on game day and that person better be a special teams player. Sternberger did a little of it when he was in Green Bay (around 30% of the ST snaps in games where he was active) but he has a gap to close there if he is going to oust Morris. 

[Matt_In_NH]

On 7/24/2023 at 8:10 AM, John from Riverside said:

I wonder if they might consider him as a practice squad stash especially if we plan on running more 12 personnel this year

I think the 12 personnel thing is getting blown out of proportion.   If Kincaid plays a lot and is split out wide, how is that really different than 11 personnel?  He is a bigger body, that will mean something but if he was to be unavialable, it would seem plausible to me to replace him with a WR vs "has to be another TE".  Now if they are going to line the TE's on the LOS then I agree they need more, I am not sure that is the plan.

 

I often think about personnel groupings and stats of them are misleading.    You could have a RB that lines up in the slot, you can have TE's that was spread.....I have always thought it would be good to track both personnel groupings and formations.  Because for instance, there may not be any real difference between one teams 12 and anothers 11 other than one guy has "TE" instead of "WR" next to his title but they do the same exact thing.

[GunnerBill]

12 minutes ago, Matt_In_NH said:

I think the 12 personnel thing is getting blown out of proportion.   If Kincaid plays a lot and is split out wide, how is that really different than 11 personnel?  He is a bigger body, that will mean something but if he was to be unavialable, it would seem plausible to me to replace him with a WR vs "has to be another TE".  Now if they are going to line the TE's on the LOS then I agree they need more, I am not sure that is the plan.

 

I often think about personnel groupings and stats of them are misleading.    You could have a RB that lines up in the slot, you can have TE's that was spread.....I have always thought it would be good to track both personnel groupings and formations.  Because for instance, there may not be any real difference between one teams 12 and anothers 11 other than one guy has "TE" instead of "WR" next to his title but they do the same exact thing.

 

Mike Gesicki is the classic example. Last year he played like 28% of his snaps as a tight end and that was the highest since his rookie year. He is not a tight end in any meaningful way. He is a big slot receiver. When the NFL famously ruled against Jimmy Graham's claim that he should be considered a wide receiver for franchise tag purposes (after a season where he played in the slot or split wide on 67% of his plays) the critical argument was that Graham when in the slot was normally still covered by a linebacker. But fast forward ten years and you see teams covering 'slot tight ends' with DBs with increasingly regularity. If teams want to try and cover Kincaid with a linebacker then be my guest.

 

I'm also not sure how the websites that track personnel groupings do it. For instance, if a team comes out in what looks like 12 personnel and then the Tight End lines up as a full back is that recorded as 12 or is it recorded as 21? To me it is misleading to record that as 12.

 

If Knox were to miss a game could I see Kincaid's tight end usage ticking up for that game.... yes, sure... he might get up to 40/50% as a tight end in that one specific game. But that isn't his strength or what he is good at.

[Thurman#1]

On 7/25/2023 at 6:47 AM, Shaw66 said:

This is a creative look at Sternberger.   Big Al said this:

 

 

Sternberger went ahead of Knox in the draft, and Big Al's description actually sounds a lot like Knox.   OK speed, OK route runner, undersized for a blocker, but that's undersized for a traditional tight end.  

 

Take another Knox and put him on the field just as DC said, in the red zone, and you've got something.   Diggs is a guy who separates like Beasley, and he's valuable, but teams were taking him away in the red zone, the Bills didn't other have good options.  I like Davis, but he hasn't been effective in the red zone.  Knox has.  Kincaid should be.   If there's a Knox clone on the field, that's four legitimate short-route targets, and it should be a simple thing for Allen to find the mismatch and go there.   Knox. Sternberger, and Kincaid all running tight curls, some small back will be boxed out by a big body.  

 

 

IMO a bit glass half-full.

 

Knox's RAS is 9.23. Sternberger's is 5.18.

 

I don't see this guy as another Knox. 

 

Having said that, I can imagine him making the team and doing some good.

 

 

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Mike Gesicki is the classic example. Last year he played like 28% of his snaps as a tight end and that was the highest since his rookie year. He is not a tight end in any meaningful way. He is a big slot receiver. When the NFL famously ruled against Jimmy Graham's claim that he should be considered a wide receiver for franchise tag purposes (after a season where he played in the slot or split wide on 67% of his plays) the critical argument was that Graham when in the slot was normally still covered by a linebacker. But fast forward ten years and you see teams covering 'slot tight ends' with DBs with increasingly regularity. If teams want to try and cover Kincaid with a linebacker then be my guest.

 

I'm also not sure how the websites that track personnel groupings do it. For instance, if a team comes out in what looks like 12 personnel and then the Tight End lines up as a full back is that recorded as 12 or is it recorded as 21? To me it is misleading to record that as 12.

 

If Knox were to miss a game could I see Kincaid's tight end usage ticking up for that game.... yes, sure... he might get up to 40/50% as a tight end in that one specific game. But that isn't his strength or what he is good at.

 

 

Yeah, that makes sense to me. 

 

I bet they're going to work on his blocking and try to get him capable of doing more there on running plays, because if he becomes a better blocker defenses have to treat him differently when he plays inline. But inline will likely be the exception.

 

He's likely more of a pass catcher but the more multiple his uses get, the better and more unpredictable the Bills look. If he's inline, he's more likely to end up covered by an LB, and if they try to play him with a DB inline, things would look good for the run game.

 

 

Edited July 26, 2023 by Thurman#1

[Shaw66]

2 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

IMO a bit glass half-full.

 

Knox's RAS is 9.23. Sternberger's is 5.18.

 

I don't see this guy as another Knox. 

 

Having said that, I can imagine him making the team and doing some good.

 

 

RAS difference is striking.  Alli said was the description I quoted sounded like Knox.  Seems he's different. 

 

Still, like you, I could see a role for him. For the Bills, he's just an experiment, like a lot free agents looking to catch on somewhere.  We'll know in a few weeks.  

[OZBILLS]

 

Never heard of him, but willing to give him a go. 

 

Hopefully not hands of stone

[NewEra]

29 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

💩 

[Beck Water]

On 7/26/2023 at 6:40 AM, GunnerBill said:

 

Mike Gesicki is the classic example. Last year he played like 28% of his snaps as a tight end and that was the highest since his rookie year. He is not a tight end in any meaningful way. He is a big slot receiver. When the NFL famously ruled against Jimmy Graham's claim that he should be considered a wide receiver for franchise tag purposes (after a season where he played in the slot or split wide on 67% of his plays) the critical argument was that Graham when in the slot was normally still covered by a linebacker. But fast forward ten years and you see teams covering 'slot tight ends' with DBs with increasingly regularity. If teams want to try and cover Kincaid with a linebacker then be my guest.

 

I'm also not sure how the websites that track personnel groupings do it. For instance, if a team comes out in what looks like 12 personnel and then the Tight End lines up as a full back is that recorded as 12 or is it recorded as 21? To me it is misleading to record that as 12.

 

If Knox were to miss a game could I see Kincaid's tight end usage ticking up for that game.... yes, sure... he might get up to 40/50% as a tight end in that one specific game. But that isn't his strength or what he is good at.

 

I'm pretty sure that the websites who track are all getting their info from a couple of sources.  So this would really be a great question to ask someone who subscribes to these sources and has access to the info - PFF, there's another one that starts with "S", maybe "Sports Statistical Information"?  That's probably wrong, meaning there's a high probability someone will pop up and correct me.

 

Anyway, I can tell you that the free websites I've found who make or made some of this information available, seem to track entirely by player position.  Which is not to say that they all do, just that the service that site uses tracks that way.

 

IOW, when Gilliam was listed as a TE, plays where he was in along with a RB and TE weeks where he played as a fullback a fair bit were listed as 1,2; when Gilliam was listed as a fullback, the same plays were listed as 2,1 and so were plays where played inline.

 

I understand your point, but I'm not sure I agree.  The logical extension would be if an RB lines up in the slot, he should be labeled a WR for that play, or if a WR lines up in the backfield and takes a handoff he should be labeled as an RB for that play.  Yet as we've seen from this week's training camp, that can all be changed in a couple seconds with pre-snap motion.  So I think there is probably value in tracking what actual player positions are on the field.

[GunnerBill]

19 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

I'm pretty sure that the websites who track are all getting their info from a couple of sources.  So this would really be a great question to ask someone who subscribes to these sources and has access to the info - PFF, there's another one that starts with "S", maybe "Sports Statistical Information"?  That's probably wrong, meaning there's a high probability someone will pop up and correct me.

 

Anyway, I can tell you that the free websites I've found who make or made some of this information available, seem to track entirely by player position.  Which is not to say that they all do, just that the service that site uses tracks that way.

 

IOW, when Gilliam was listed as a TE, plays where he was in along with a RB and TE weeks where he played as a fullback a fair bit were listed as 1,2; when Gilliam was listed as a fullback, the same plays were listed as 2,1 and so were plays where played inline.

 

I understand your point, but I'm not sure I agree.  The logical extension would be if an RB lines up in the slot, he should be labeled a WR for that play, or if a WR lines up in the backfield and takes a handoff he should be labeled as an RB for that play.  Yet as we've seen from this week's training camp, that can all be changed in a couple seconds with pre-snap motion.  So I think there is probably value in tracking what actual player positions are on the field.

 

Maybe but as football becomes more and more positionless I think that argument becomes more difficult to sustain. We all know there are players whose official position designation is not where they play on the football field.

[Beck Water]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Maybe but as football becomes more and more positionless I think that argument becomes more difficult to sustain. We all know there are players whose official position designation is not where they play on the football field.

 

I mean, if football is truly positionless, then describing offensive personnel sets would also be meaningless.

 

At this point, though, I think one would have to say that there are exceptions, but the clear majority of the time neither is true.

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Beck Water said:

 

I mean, if football is truly positionless, then describing offensive personnel sets would also be meaningless.

 

At this point, though, I think one would have to say that there are exceptions, but the clear majority of the time neither is true.

 

I suppose I think formation will increasingly matter more than personnel.

[Beck Water]

45 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I suppose I think formation will increasingly matter more than personnel.

 

On the one hand, that's always been true.  Look at our own Thurman Thomas.

 

On the other hand, I think personnel who can truly play multiple roles from multiple formations AT AN ELITE LEVEL on a regular basis, are and will continue to be relatively rare.  Or to put it in concrete terms, Gesickis are a lot more common than Gronkowskis or Kelces.